SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - Gaming revolution ahead?

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)

- General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)

- - Gaming revolution ahead? (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=149722)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybird (Post 1071049)

No ridiculous expensive gaming hardware anymore. No insane expensive constant tech updates anymore. No sinful expensive nVidia and Intel and ATI chips needed.

No more mods making a mediocre game excellent...:hmmm:

I'll stick with what works for me thanks.

Will people ever move out of the computer Dark Ages, I wonder?:D

Yup, sooner than you might want too. But don't wonder then why the government or any chicken sh*t private company knows everything about you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schroeder (Post 1071609)

But don't wonder then why the government or any chicken sh*t private company knows everything about you.

Do you use Google?

No. Exactly because of that. If I HAVE to use it I use a proxy between me and Google.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7962180.stm

Quote:

With the data being sent from servers just fifty miles away, the men boasted of being able to play with one-millisecond of lag (...)
Users will need a high-speed broadband connection of at least 1.5 megabits per second for standard definition results or 5 megabits per second for high definition. (...)
So far ten publishers have signed up to provide titles for OnLive. They include familiar names like Atari Interactive, Electronic Arts, Ubisoft, Take-Two Interactive Software and Warner Bros.
"OnLive fits our digital strategy, which is to bring content to as many distribution points as possible," Scott Guthrie, vice president of software publishers THQ told the San Francisco Chronicle.
(...)
Mr Perlman said he understood why some people might be wary of what they are selling but that he wants people to question what OnLive can do.
"What we have is something that is absolutely incredible. You should be sceptical. My first thinking was this shouldn't work, but it does."
Analysts believe the success of OnLive could go one of two ways depending on pricing models.
"Depending on what business model these guys adopt, they could be wildly successful or a footnote in history," said Michael Pachter an analyst with Wedbush Morgan Securities.

No matter the pricing model, the ghost (teczhnology) is out of the bottle. Smething tells me this is the way the future will work out. Remember that rumours say that the next "Flight Simulator" will not be released as a hardcopy now that ACES have been closed, but will be an exclusively online-run experience. In principal this model just is the logical consequence, the next step of the path that was entered by the distributionmodel of Half Life 2 and the rise of STEAM.

I don't like it, but that'S how it most likely will go. i also do not like to watch movies via internet TV, but the market for that is expanding, and is expanding fast. People get used to it. Kids und teens will be far less critical and will not compare it with earlier experiences (they do not have), they slowly but surely will make sure the balance shifts in favour of these ways of distribution and consummation.

So, I wonder how they plan on handling LAN games then? If each game requires 1.5 mb/s of bandwidth and the 7 computers in my home were each playing a game (together or not), I'd have to have an effective bandwidth of 10.5 mb/s (for crappy standard resolution). Gee, I wonder how much that would set me back.

Guess I'll have to live in Stealth Hunter's computer dark ages until they figure that one out. This may be the way the future works out, but, thank goodness, the future's not here yet.:yeah:

Ugh I also don't like the sound of this, for one thing this wont save us any money, as we will have to pay for their server farms and video processors, not to mention continuous profits for them. And we don't own anything after all that money. It would also allow them to monitor what we play and when we play, and with the ISPs putting monthly usage limits of 60-100gb a month we would get hit that way too.

Unfortunatly this is probably the future, where we own nothing, but are all renters. Yet another step towards being true wage slaves.

Meh, it's only a matter of time before people figure out the problems inherent in such a system, this thing isn't going to revolutionize the gaming industry...at least not until network lag is completely abolished by some way

I say boycot the darn thing and put an end to it before it manages to gain ground. :arrgh!:

Neon, good point. At least with your box at home and hardcopies you have something tangible. If you stop paying those fees, you're left with absolutely nothing. Now if I feel nostalgic and want to play Diablo II, at least I don't have to get a gdarn subscription.

Sometimes I really wonder who the idiots are; us for letting people/businesses get away with it, or them for even thinking they can get away with it. Only time will tell.

Just thinking about a future like that makes me sad. :cry:

Everyone, prepare to be surprised, it is worse than the hype.:o

Quote:

But unfortunately, the illusion faded along with the loading screen. Once I was in the game itself, I immediately noticed the unwelcome signs of blocky compression. It wasn't so compressed that it was entirely distracting from the gameplay, but it was also worse than I expected. The visual quality was high, but the experience was marred by the considerable amount of splotchy pixels.

Playing around in Rapture, I found that response-time lag was mostly unnoticeable--mostly. When turning quickly, there were disappointing moments of hitching here and there. It was an impressive technical accomplishment, but at the same time unquestionably inferior to playing from a disc.

It may represent the future of PC gaming, but the visual and lag issues, subscription cost, online-only nature of the product and other caveats will hold it back from being an immediate no-brainer.

http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/57855

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raptor1 (Post 1071701)

I am fairly sure laws of physics get in the way of that.

Does anyone realize what it takes to transfer a 1024x768 frame even over 100Mbit connection?

The point being - it will be a fine technology for the women (not being sexiest, just statistical) who like to play little 2D games who might want a little 3D, or it might be find for someone with a netbook that doesn't have the horsepower. As far as the rest of us are concerned, forget it.

-S

PS. I forgot the misguided Red Hat Linux people - they think its the next best thing too.

PPS. And I forgot Micorsoft who already said the only reason they are interested is the 'control' factor -

Quote:

...The ability to maintain control over the platform is another reason Microsoft cites for implementing such a system -- in fact its the primary reason to adopt such a scheme say Windows managers....

http://www.dailytech.com/Microsoft+L...ticle14677.htm

Read the above article in full (see the link) if you don't believe me.

Another thing comes to mind. Gaming is resource intensive; how many gamers would a server be able to service? I think not too many (5 to 10?). How much would such a server cost? I think a lot. Just the cost for the graphics hardware would double the pricetag of the whole box (quadro SLI/Crossfire with dual GPU cards?) easily. What is that gonna do for the monthly fees?

And on top of that the bandwith issue? The more you think about this, the more ridiculous it seems. :hmmm:

Wow. this Idea makes me think someone forgot to take there "duah... What could be the issues with this" Pills this morening.

This Idea sounds about as good as a invisiable car.

Its cool when your driveing it. But after you park it get out, and leave for a while (forget where it was at.) it dosent sound like such a great idea. (crappy I know. lol)